| Author |
Message |
stephaniepark
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 10
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:08 am
|  |
My initial 10 were rejected and I was wondering if you could tell me why and give me any tips?
I hope I posted the pictures right...
| Description: |
Roses made out of soap.
Rejected for composition, focus, and poor lighting. |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
DSC_0033.jpg |
| Filesize: |
142.12 KB |
| Downloaded: |
145 Time(s) |
| Description: |
Christmas candles.
Rejected for composition, focus, and poor lighting. |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
SDC10382.jpg |
| Filesize: |
76.85 KB |
| Downloaded: |
137 Time(s) |
| Description: |
Colorado.
Rejected for focus. |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
P7240124.jpg |
| Filesize: |
110.3 KB |
| Downloaded: |
159 Time(s) |
|
|
kellyplz
Joined: 09 Mar 2009
Posts: 416
Location: Manitoulin Island, Canada.
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:12 am
| |
Number 1 has harsh shadows, number 2 is noisy and the composition is off and the third has bad banding in the sky. Read the forums often and you'll learn a lot, I sure have!
|
|
stephaniepark
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 10
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:15 am
| |
Ok thank you. On number 3 how should I fix the banding? It's not showing up on the original...
|
|
stephaniepark
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 10
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:20 am
| |
Here are some more.
| Description: |
Shackleford Bay Island at Low Tide.
Rejected for noise. |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
SDC11812_2.jpg |
| Filesize: |
200.49 KB |
| Downloaded: |
116 Time(s) |
| Description: |
Smiling frog.
Rejected for focus. |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
SDC14652_2.jpg |
| Filesize: |
78.11 KB |
| Downloaded: |
112 Time(s) |
|
|
digigandalf
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 2584
Location: Twinsburg, OH
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:50 am
| |
The banding mentioned above from the file being compressed for display here. If it's not in the original, it shouldn't be a problem in the actual image submitted. But the focus is a little soft on the buildings across the lake.
The same problem of compression artifacts shows up in the 4th image, which hopefully aren't there in the submitted version. But there is a fringe of artifacts just above the tree line, which may be evident in the orginal.
For critique purposes it's best to submit a small version of the whole image accompanied with a crop at 100%. This article explains how to do that: http://submit.shutterstock.com/newsletter/109/article1.html
In the frog image the DOF is too shallow. Only part of one eye is actually in focus; the whole face really should be.
Hope this was helpful.
|
|
hhltdave5
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 10893
Location: Our stock and food photography books at www.rindersmithphotography.com
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 8:56 am
| |
From looking at what you have posted so far I can see some potential but for stock work on cutting back on the more "artsy" side of photography. Think good clean stock shots or something that will help sell a product, concept or idea.
I posted a link to an article I wrote geared to the newcomer in your other thread. I suggest taking a look at that for some suggestions on how to proceed.
What type of camera are you using? Some of the images look a bit cooked (over processed).
|
|
stephaniepark
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 10
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:51 am
| |
Ok thanks :)
For some I used the Point-and-Shoot Samsung TL34 HD 14.7 Megapixels and for others I used my DSLR Nikon D5000 12.3 Megapixels.
|
|
| |
|
Log in
